Cargando…
Comparison of Wear Resistance of Hawley and Vacuum Formed Retainers: An in-vitro Study
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: As a physical property, wear resistance of the materials used in the fabrication of orthodontic retainers play a significant role in the stability and long term use of the appliances. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the wear resistance of two commonly used materials for orthodontic ret...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Journal of Dental Biomaterials
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5608059/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28959750 |
_version_ | 1783265377309949952 |
---|---|
author | V, Moshkelgosha M, Shomali M, Momeni |
author_facet | V, Moshkelgosha M, Shomali M, Momeni |
author_sort | V, Moshkelgosha |
collection | PubMed |
description | STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: As a physical property, wear resistance of the materials used in the fabrication of orthodontic retainers play a significant role in the stability and long term use of the appliances. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the wear resistance of two commonly used materials for orthodontic retainers: Acropars OP, i.e. a polymethyl methacrylate based material, and 3A-GS060, i.e. a polyethylene based material. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For each material, 30 orthodontic retainers were made according to the manufacturers’ instructions and a 30×30×2 mm block was cut out from the mid- palatal area of each retainer. Each specimen underwent 1000 cycles of wear stimulation in a pin on disc machine. The depth of wear of each specimen was measured using a Nano Wizard II atomic force microscope in 3 random points of each specimen’s wear trough. The average of these three measurements was calculated and considered as mean value wear depth of each specimen (µm). RESULTS: The mean wear depth was 6.10µm and 2.15µm for 3A-GS060 and Acropars OP groups respectively. Independent t-test showed a significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.001). The results show Polymethyl methacrylate base (Acropars) is more wear resistance than the polyethylene based material (3A-GS060). CONCLUSIONS: As the higher wear resistance of the fabrication material can improve the retainers’ survival time and its cost-effectiveness, VFRs should be avoided in situations that the appliance needs high wear resistance such as bite blocks opposing occlusal forces. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5608059 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Journal of Dental Biomaterials |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56080592017-09-28 Comparison of Wear Resistance of Hawley and Vacuum Formed Retainers: An in-vitro Study V, Moshkelgosha M, Shomali M, Momeni J Dent Biomater Original Article STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: As a physical property, wear resistance of the materials used in the fabrication of orthodontic retainers play a significant role in the stability and long term use of the appliances. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the wear resistance of two commonly used materials for orthodontic retainers: Acropars OP, i.e. a polymethyl methacrylate based material, and 3A-GS060, i.e. a polyethylene based material. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For each material, 30 orthodontic retainers were made according to the manufacturers’ instructions and a 30×30×2 mm block was cut out from the mid- palatal area of each retainer. Each specimen underwent 1000 cycles of wear stimulation in a pin on disc machine. The depth of wear of each specimen was measured using a Nano Wizard II atomic force microscope in 3 random points of each specimen’s wear trough. The average of these three measurements was calculated and considered as mean value wear depth of each specimen (µm). RESULTS: The mean wear depth was 6.10µm and 2.15µm for 3A-GS060 and Acropars OP groups respectively. Independent t-test showed a significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.001). The results show Polymethyl methacrylate base (Acropars) is more wear resistance than the polyethylene based material (3A-GS060). CONCLUSIONS: As the higher wear resistance of the fabrication material can improve the retainers’ survival time and its cost-effectiveness, VFRs should be avoided in situations that the appliance needs high wear resistance such as bite blocks opposing occlusal forces. Journal of Dental Biomaterials 2016-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5608059/ /pubmed/28959750 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Dental Biomaterials http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article V, Moshkelgosha M, Shomali M, Momeni Comparison of Wear Resistance of Hawley and Vacuum Formed Retainers: An in-vitro Study |
title | Comparison of Wear Resistance of Hawley and Vacuum Formed
Retainers: An in-vitro Study |
title_full | Comparison of Wear Resistance of Hawley and Vacuum Formed
Retainers: An in-vitro Study |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Wear Resistance of Hawley and Vacuum Formed
Retainers: An in-vitro Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Wear Resistance of Hawley and Vacuum Formed
Retainers: An in-vitro Study |
title_short | Comparison of Wear Resistance of Hawley and Vacuum Formed
Retainers: An in-vitro Study |
title_sort | comparison of wear resistance of hawley and vacuum formed
retainers: an in-vitro study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5608059/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28959750 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vmoshkelgosha comparisonofwearresistanceofhawleyandvacuumformedretainersaninvitrostudy AT mshomali comparisonofwearresistanceofhawleyandvacuumformedretainersaninvitrostudy AT mmomeni comparisonofwearresistanceofhawleyandvacuumformedretainersaninvitrostudy |